Re: getXXX methods
От | Dave Cramer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: getXXX methods |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1089145387.1506.65.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: getXXX methods (Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: getXXX methods
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Once possibility is to use Double.parseDouble(s).byteValue() so the code would become try { Byte.parseByte(s) } catch(NumberFormatException e) { try { return Double.parseDouble(s).ByteValue(); } catch( NumberFormatException ne ) { throw exception; } } Dave On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 14:46, Kris Jurka wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Dave Cramer wrote: > > > There is a table in the jdbc spec which suggests that > > there is a preferred method for getting the column information, and at > > non-preferred method. > > > > would all the numeric values be truncated ? > > > > What do we do with char, varchar, longvarchar ? > > It's tough to say. Looking at the current situation for retrieving double > values with getInt() the current driver will throw an Exception on a out > of range value because it starts with a String and uses Integer.parseInt() > on it. Contrast this with the result of > > Double d = new Double(Double.MAX_VALUE); > System.out.println(d.intValue()); > > which truncates the double to Integer.MAX_VALUE. The javadocs are > useless, but I prefer the Exception to silent truncation, so I would > suggest getByte can be used on any integer value of -128 to 127 regardless > of its storage form (like text). The question of comparing floating point > numbers should be the same, but we may run into problems when 1 is > represented as 1.00000001. > > Kris Jurka > > > > !DSPAM:40eaf9e7148133410918667! > > -- Dave Cramer 519 939 0336 ICQ # 14675561
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: